If the officer that charged me with speeding took TRAFFIC HISTORY as required (visual sighting and estimation of speed), states that this was a jusitifiable cause to engage the radar, then could I argue that his eye sight was a tool in speed enforcement? If his eye sight is a tool, then am I correct in arguing that his eye sight must be tested and verified to be at least 20/20? Can he prove it and does his detachment have an annual eye check policy? If I am guilty because of the 'strict liability laws', then must the prosecution prove that all measuring tools are acurate? I haven't read anything about this before, but I KNOW I was not going 110 KM as the officer states.
If the officer that charged me with speeding took TRAFFIC HISTORY as required (visual sighting and estimation of speed), states that this was a jusitifiable cause to engage the radar, then could I argue that his eye sight was a tool in speed enforcement?
If his eye sight is a tool, then am I correct in arguing that his eye sight must be tested and verified to be at least 20/20? Can he prove it and does his detachment have an annual eye check policy?
If I am guilty because of the 'strict liability laws', then must the prosecution prove that all measuring tools are acurate?
I haven't read anything about this before, but I KNOW I was not going 110 KM as the officer states.
The officer that pulled me over and charged me has recently been in several news articles related to speeding and speed blitzs in his area. Can I question him on the professional benefits to his career by taking part in such activities. Can I bring forward the fact that because of his active participation that he may have undue predjuice and be over zealous when it comes to ticketing those he is assuming are speeding. I can bring copies of periodicals showing his participation? I am positive that I was NOT going as fast as I have been charged with.
The officer that pulled me over and charged me has recently been in several news articles related to speeding and speed blitzs in his area.
Can I question him on the professional benefits to his career by taking part in such activities. Can I bring forward the fact that because of his active participation that he may have undue predjuice and be over zealous when it comes to ticketing those he is assuming are speeding. I can bring copies of periodicals showing his participation?
I am positive that I was NOT going as fast as I have been charged with.
Post above was merged in from another thread. Please keep all posts related to the same ticket on the same thread. Makes it easier for everyone to follow the subject... No. His eyesight only has to be good enough to verify that the vehicle was speeding. There is no set standard for it. His testimony that he could see you speeding is good enough. You could try bringing in an eye chart, but unless you are, or have, a qualified optometrist, that's going to go nowhere. (In other words, I wouldn't recommend it.) Professional benefits? Such as? This would be a fruitless fishing expedition, IMO. It does not have anything to do with, whether you were exceeding the posted speed limit at the time. You'd need some way of showing that he deliberately falsified evidence. This article you refer to hardly sounds like it. Do the articles state that he has been previously caught faking traffic stops? Falsifying evidence? If not, what's the point? He's in traffic enforcement, his job is to stop and ticket people who do things like exceed the speed limit, etc. Where's the prejudice? If anything, this would backfire, because it would tend to show that the officer is experienced and dedicated to what he's doing. Speeding cases are not won on novel defences. They are won on technicalities, or goof-ups by the Prosecutor/officer. The stuff you're going after does not count as either. You're better off digging through the radar manual to see the correct methods for testing and using the device, and other things like that.
Post above was merged in from another thread. Please keep all posts related to the same ticket on the same thread. Makes it easier for everyone to follow the subject...
Helper wrote:
If his eye sight is a tool, then am I correct in arguing that his eye sight must be tested and verified to be at least 20/20?
No. His eyesight only has to be good enough to verify that the vehicle was speeding. There is no set standard for it. His testimony that he could see you speeding is good enough. You could try bringing in an eye chart, but unless you are, or have, a qualified optometrist, that's going to go nowhere. (In other words, I wouldn't recommend it.)
Helper wrote:
Can I question him on the professional benefits to his career by taking part in such activities.
Professional benefits? Such as? This would be a fruitless fishing expedition, IMO. It does not have anything to do with, whether you were exceeding the posted speed limit at the time. You'd need some way of showing that he deliberately falsified evidence. This article you refer to hardly sounds like it.
Helper wrote:
The officer that pulled me over and charged me has recently been in several news articles related to speeding and speed blitzs in his area.
Do the articles state that he has been previously caught faking traffic stops? Falsifying evidence? If not, what's the point? He's in traffic enforcement, his job is to stop and ticket people who do things like exceed the speed limit, etc. Where's the prejudice? If anything, this would backfire, because it would tend to show that the officer is experienced and dedicated to what he's doing. Speeding cases are not won on novel defences. They are won on technicalities, or goof-ups by the Prosecutor/officer. The stuff you're going after does not count as either. You're better off digging through the radar manual to see the correct methods for testing and using the device, and other things like that.
* The above is NOT legal advice. By acting on anything I have said, you assume responsibility for any outcome and consequences. *
http://www.OntarioTicket.com OR http://www.OHTA.ca
Hi everyone. I'm asking for a friend who has a question of interpretation.
He was ticketed for using a hand-held device. He contends that he was acting within the exemption provided under Subsection 14 (1) of O. Reg. 366/09, which reads as follows (emphasis added):
Hey guys i just wanted to know what speeds you see others do on the roads on a regular basis. As we all know no body drives 100 km. It seems they only hit that speed twice once on the way up and once on the way down.
it seems the De Facto limit on the 401 is about 120-130. But lately i dont know if…
On June 10, 2017, I was pulled over by an OPP on the 403 heading WB and told I registered 136km/hr. I kept chit chat to a minimum and took my ticket and went on with my day. I later requested my disclosure and did not receive it until a week before my Oct. 27 court date, and so I had my date…
Anyone know any more information? Apparently kathleen wynne mentioned trying to introduce legislation after more than 20 years of no speed cameras. My guess is that it wont happen, since they've tried before many times to bring it back after it was abolished.
The other day I was given a ticket for speeding 119 in a 90, on highway 17 near Marathon, ON (Speeding ticket capital of the universe, BTW). The officer claims to have "clocked" me using the vehicle mounted radar at 121 KMH and dropped it (presumably to lower fine and demerits).
I posted this in the 3 Demerit Section and haven't received any
responses.
I received a failure to stop at an amber light ticket on April 17, 2009. At my First Attendance Meeting I asked to read the police officer's notes and remember thinking how ridiculous they were and the difficulty…
I was on the right side of the road going straight when a pedestrian waved down the taxi driver in the lane next to me. He pulled over to the right without any notice or signalling and hit me with the side of his car.
There were many witnesses but I immediately had a concussion and did not think of…
My mother was driving EB on a 4 lane street (2 lanes EB, 2 lanes WB).
She was in the left hand lane and started a left hand turn so as to enter a side street, crossing WB traffic. There was NO intersection. She hit a cyclist who was heading WB. Police where called but none showed up. My…
If the speed limit is 50, and you do 100+, not only do you get 6 points. Your car gets impounded for a week, and your license suspended for 7 days, along with a hefty fine of at least $2000. The penalty is actually the same as for racing. The law came in effect on October 1, 2007. Remember -…
I was driving westbound on Hwy. 8 earlier this month in North Dumfries Township, approaching the Cambridge city limits. The weather was clear and the roads were dry. I noticed a vehicle on the shoulder on my side of the road, pointing towards me. This didn't concern me right away, as it is a rural…
